eyewitness testimonies Flashcards
what is an eyewitness testimony?
the ability of people to remember details of events that they themselves have observed
what are the two factors effecting the accuracy of EWT?
•misleading information
•anxiety
what two forms can misleading information take?
•leading questions: a question that suggests a certain answer
•post event discussion: this could be conversations with witnesses, solicitors or police
what was the method and results of Loftus and Palmers ‘car crash’ study?
•loftus and palmer (1974) arranged for participants (students) to watch film clips of car accidents and gave them questions about it
•in the critical question (a leading question) participants were asked about how fast the cars were travelling
•participants were each asked different questions with different verbs (hit, bumped, collided, smashed)
•different verbs led to different estimated speeds by the participants
•the verb ‘contacted’ resulted in a mean estimate of 31.8mph
•the verb ‘smashed’ was 40.5mph
what is a limitation of loftus and palmers car crash study?
•critics wondered whether the participants were just responding to the ‘forcefulness’ of the verb and questioned whether their memories of the crash were actually changed (whether the car sped up or slowed down in their mind)
what is a strength of loftus and palmers car crash study?
•they conducted a follow- up study
•they conducted a second experiment that supported the substitution explanation, that the word choice in the leading question actually alters the participants memories of the car crash clip
•this is as the participants who heard ‘smashed’ were more likely to report seeing broken glass (even though there was none) by the crash
•did you see the broken glass?
-the ‘smashed’ group were twice as likely to say yes than the ‘hit’ group
•the verb choice does actually alter memories of the incident
what is post-event discussion?
when co-witnesses of a crime discuss it, this may cause (mis)information from others to become incorporated in their own memories
who investigated post-event discussion?
Fiona Gabbert
what was the study conducted into post-event discussion?
•Gabbert and co. studied participants in pairs. each participant watched a video of the same crime, but filmed from different points of view
•both participants then discussed what they had seen before individually completing a test of recall
what were the results of Gabbert’s study?
•the researcher found that 71% of the participants mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they had not seen but had picked up in the discussion
•the corresponding figure in a control group (ones that didn’t discuss what they had seen) was 0%
•Gabbert concluded that witnesses often go along with eachother, either to win social approval or because they believe other witnesses are right and they are wrong
what is it called when people change their eyewitness testimonies due to post-event discussion?
memory conformity
what is a strength of the post-event discussion study?
•research has led to changes in the criminal justice system
•courts are much more cautious when presented with EWT as evidence
what is are 3 limitations of post-event discussion studies?
•research into EWT has involved very artificial activities being conducted in laboratories and is criticised for lacking ecological validity. This means the same results may not be found in real-life situations
•in real life, being a witness to a crime can make a significant emotional impact on the individual. However, the memory recall tasks performed in lab based studies does not have this emotional significance
•participants in research studies are usually ready to be cooperative, and therefore are even more likely to be influenced by leading questions. This ‘acquiescence bias’ weakens the validity of the research findings.
what effect does anxiety have on recall?
anxiety can have a positive or negative effect on recall
who conducted a study saying anxiety has a negative effect on recall?
Johnson and Scott
What was the method of johnson and scott’s study?
•they made participants think they were going to take part in a lab study, and while seated in a waiting area they head an argument in the next room
•in the ‘low anxiety’ condition, a man walked through the waiting area carrying a pen with grease on his hands
•in the ‘high anxiety’ condition, participants overheard the same argument but then accompanied by the sound of breaking glass. then a man walked out with a paper knife that was covered in blood